3 Answers

  1. It depends on what is meant by inadequacy.�

    • If you are referring to mental disorders, then you must pass the appropriate medical tests. Some of them are available on the Internet. However, it is better to contact a specialist for conclusions.
    • Very often, this does not mean mental disorders, but, for example, a low level of culture, looseness, promiscuity. For example, a person is given a well-deserved remark, and he snaps, covers everyone with obscenity, behaves defiantly. These are problems of a cultural, possibly psychological nature (the presence of complexes, a defensive reaction, etc.) Typical examples: one well-known deputy, gypsies in the market, ill-mannered hyperactive children, etc. In this regard, everything is conditional, there are no clear boundaries, but nevertheless, some basic level of adequacy can be found based on experience and common sense. You can also take some psychological tests. This will help you understand yourself better. Here is a collection of good tests https://www.adme.ru/svoboda-psihologiya/10-proverennyh-testov-po-psihologii-kotorye-mozhno-projti-onlajn-1181610/
    • Often, inadequacy means banal everyday stupidity. This is the result of inexperience, or being programmed with some ideas and attitudes, or simply a consequence of a low intellectual level, or a banal unwillingness to think or think critically. For example, going to elections, where all the results are falsified in advance (but the person is convinced that his vote is important), buying more expensive shampoo because of beautiful advertising (although all tests say that there is not much difference between them), buying an expensive phone on credit, when you can hardly make ends meet (there are also psychological problems, the desire to assert yourself by owning a prestigious status item). Or, for example, autocratic bosses who first disorganize the workflow, break its logic and efficiency, because they do not understand it, but believe that they understand everything, and then blame their subordinates for not working well. Here, again, experience, the development of critical thinking, advice from wise people and a general desire to develop will help.
    • You may also be called inadequate if you don't respond to something in the way that is expected of you. For example, “yazhmat” crosses the street in the wrong place with a stroller, you signal it, and it obscenities you, says that you are a cad and inadequate, because you woke up her child with your signal. It is obvious that you do not go beyond the limits of adequacy, but she calmly accuses you of what she suffers from. This also includes our valiant cops, who behave like ordinary gopniks. Emotional stability, life experience, and the ability to resolve conflict situations will help you here. To do this, get to know yourself and develop personally.
      Your question can only be answered in more detail when it is clear what you mean by inadequate.

    The main thing, do not forget one thing: in one context or another, each of us is somehow inadequate =)

  2. Probably every psychiatrist has been asked this question at least once. Arguments on the topic of normality and adequacy from the framework of psychiatry always begin to move into the framework of philosophy, culture, religion and jurisprudence. By the way, normality and adequacy are far from synonymous, so I would still like to know what the author of the question meant. What is the adequacy or inadequacy of maintenance? If the author of “inadequacy” meant a mental disorder, then in psychiatry ( and not only ) there are diseases that have symptoms that are collected in syndromes: if you are once disturbed, then no one will put generalized anxiety disorder on you, but if anxiety has begun to occupy most of your life, your mood has decreased, social adaptation, sleep and appetite have been disrupted, then here is a whole complex by which you can Some painful tendencies can be noticed by mental patients themselves, but they do not need to be tested for adequacy here, the person understands that something has begun to bother him and he is doing something about it. But some symptoms in psychiatry are not recognized by patients as symptoms of ill health: a delusional patient who believes that Americans suck his thoughts into the heating system really thinks so, but in no case will he go to a psychiatrist and say, they say, treat me. Moreover, such a delusional patient may be quite adequate for other people who are not involved in the delusional system or are at the stage of forming delusional ideas, such a person can live in peace, stand next to you in the queue at the checkout in Pyaterochka, ride with you in a full bus after work and you will never and for nothing think that this beautiful young man Delusional ideas may not initially have a large scale, some patients may hide from everyone that they actually suspect something. When a patient is caught up in a delusional idea, then yes, delusional behavior is involved: they can move to other cities, hiding from imaginary pursuers, they can build various protective installations, traps, they can even kill someone or cause physical harm. In fact, there is already a closer criterion of insanity than adequacy, but, as a rule,a delusional patient is sure of his sanity and adequacy for the whole hundred percent. This is the kind of adequacy that the author wants to test himself for?�

    Sometimes he asks people a counter question: “Do you consider yourself normal and mentally healthy?” and the strange thing is that so many healthy people call themselves sick:”I get very angry”, “I get annoyed with children!”, “I often get offended” – all these are not symptoms of a mental illness and this should be clearly understood. Psychiatry doesn't consider you sick if you're just gay, vegan, dye your hair pink, like to dilute hot tea with water, or you've yelled at your dog a couple of times. Now, if you're a gay vegan who yelled at your dog because you think it's not your dog, but an undercover FSB agent who mixed something nasty in your tea diluted with water, then the psychiatrist will want to talk to you more seriously. No syndrome , no disease. All. We're going our separate ways.�

    In psychiatry, as for me, there are controversial issues of “normality” within the framework of personality disorders (of a pathological nature), which are not a disease, but at the same time are characterized as a pathological condition. Personality disorder (psychopathy) is when someone's character is so pretentious and “ugly” that some areas of the psyche (emotions and will) suffer, but intelligence and memory are preserved at the same time. The psychopath, according to certain criteria of Gannushkik, must be disapt, absolutely not break through in the traits of his character and is so total in them that he is a psychopath, every second of his life and occupies all the space in which they are located with their psychopaths. But, alas, these criteria do not work at all, now many psychopaths are adapted even better than the usual non-pathological character of people, moreover, psychopathic traits are very convenient and necessary in many areas of life, so psychopaths have become loved by society, they achieve success (there are a lot of psychopathies in the circles of media and creative personalities). A psychopath, due to some problems in the emotional sphere, can show himself in many stressful situations better than a conditionally non-pathological person. Therefore, you can argue here indefinitely, but it is in this area that the question arises where to distinguish between norm and pathology. Are psychopaths adequate? In general, yes, everything else depends on the context.�

    So what is adequacy? Соответствие Meeting the requirements of the situation? Meeting people's expectations?�

    Is it always appropriate behavior to meet expectations and requirements? Or maybe it's just passively submissive behavior? Does a schizophrenic behave appropriately when he calls the police to tell them that a magnetic field is being applied to him from an unknown distance? Do you act appropriately when you are not working at your favorite job and take out a loan that you can hardly pay?

    Very ambivalent. You can twist the concepts of “norm”, “adequacy”, “pathology”,” morality”,” correctness ” indefinitely, but here are clear criteria for the disease and clear criteria for sanity / insanity, perhaps a more objective thing.

  3. Try to pass the Finnish army test. It is quite visual, and will quickly show you the result.

    The pointochromic testing method is an innovative (2003) synthesis of the Freeling test and Rabkin tables, which originally served to detect color blindness. Experiments have shown that even if the patient is not colorblind, with a certain configuration of color spots, he still has selective color blindness, which clearly correlates with a certain psychological deviation. The exceptional representativeness of the test, the simplicity and speed of the procedure have won the approval of leading psychoanalysts around the world.

    Since 2007, this technique has been used in the Finnish army to detect mental disorders in conscripts.

    You need to name the numbers located inside the circles. If a recruit sees numbers in all six circles�— he is healthy. If the future soldier does not see numbers in several circles at once, he should be checked for color blindness. And if the recruit does not see the number in only one circle, then he has one of the following deviations and may develop:

    • Circle 1. Increased aggressiveness, conflict. It is recommended to pay a lot of attention to contrast showers and physical exercises.

    • Circle 2. Reduced mental abilities. When serving in general branches of the armed forces, no additional measures are required.

    • Circle 3. Gasterimargia (gluttony). Increased rations, more physical exercise, sedentary work and work in the kitchen are contraindicated.

    • Circle 4. Sadism. If the form is mild, it is recommended to be assigned to the teaching staff, and if the form is severe, it is recommended to be assigned to the disciplinary department.

    • Circle 5. Latent (hidden, suppressed) homosexuality. Attacks of weakly controlled attraction to people of their own sex are possible. No additional measures are required.

    • Circle 6. Schizophrenia. A full check-up with a psychiatrist is recommended.

Leave a Reply